For many films, huge special effects, dramatic plot lines, particularly good-looking people and scenic filming locations are used as a crutch for the film lean on, a way for the film to hide a meaningless and shallow plot. When viewers are able to see through the superficiality that a film like this depends on, the viewer is left wanting more. It is not very often that a film comes along that mimics the skilled techniques of a quality theatrical production, moving audiences with no special effects, a small cast of average looking actors or actresses, and ordinary sets. Himlens Hjarta (Heaven's Heart, 2008. Sweden) is one of the few films that is able to do so much with so little. This heartbreakingly stirring film is about two couples, their opinions on adultery, and the way they cope with adultery once they are faced with it. The fabric of this film is made up of four characters, two ordinary home settings, and not a stitch of special effects. This film, though not an example of the upbeat entertainment most look for in films, earns merit based on its simplicity.
Heaven's heart tells the story of two couples. Ulf and Ann, the first married couple, are best friends with Susanna and Lars, the other married couple. The film follows the couples at dinner parties and other interactions at their two homes, all centering on the topic of adultery. Through a conversation at their first dinner party in the film, the viewers are enlightened to their individual opinions on the matter. Lars and Ann are adamantly opposed to adultery in any form while Ulf and Susanna seem to think there are some exceptions. Ironically, it is Lars and Ann who begin an affair, putting to the test all that their formerly understanding spouses had said on the matter previously. Ulf seems more understanding than Susanna, ultimately, and the movie ends on a bittersweet note where one couple finds a way to move past and the other ends broken.
This is not a film I would normally enjoy watching. This film is not an escape but rather a reminder of the loss of trust, a common experience in society. This theme is woven throughout the film, along with the theme of deception, as the audience is privy to the cheating being hidden from friends and spouses. The film is also not visually stimulating. The costumes are everyday clothing, the sets look like average Scandinavian homes, and the cast is made up of four actors. The realistic aspect of the film that those simple choices provide gives the viewer the sense that they are at a theater rather than watching a film.
One aspect of this film that stood out to me, that a theatrical production would be unable to produce, is the different shots the director chose to use to magnify the scenes. The shots in this film are still and simple. There is not a single time that the camera pans, there are only a few times when it slowly zooms in, and only a few shots are shown with more than one person. The shots of characters alone, closely showing the emotions displayed on their expressive faces, magnifies the isolation each character feels as they are alienated from their friends and their spouse, navigating through unfamiliar relationship issues.
Though the four characters are ordinary in many ways, their acting is anything but. Mikael Persbrandt (Lars), Lena Endre (Susanna), Jakob Eklund (Ulf), and Maria Lundqvist (Ann) make up this stellar cast. The cast is able to portray the difficult circumstances and their individual heartbreak in a way that the audience leaves feeling like they just lost their friends and spouse. Quick wit and sharp jabs, especially from Susanna towards her husband Lars, show clearly the anger that is felt because of his betrayal, betrayal that she had been justifying within someone else's life earlier in the film. And while this anger accumulates and their relationship ends in a divorce attorney's office, Ann and Ulf rekindle what they had lost, proving the old phrase "you don't know what you've got until it is gone."
The bittersweet aspect of this film's ending comes from the fact that while Lars thought he had found what he was looking for in Ann, he wrecked his relationship with his wife, his best friend, and ended up helping Ann and Ulf rekindle their romance. The film leaves audiences in a moral dilemma. While many can see that the film shows the moral high ground as Lars, the cheating husband, ends up estranged from his wife and daughter, the flip side is that Ann, the cheating wife, ends up with the life she has always dreamed of thus posing the question to the audience that the couples began the film trying to figure out. Is there any justification for adultery?
Technically speaking, this film excels in many ways that traditional films do not. And while I greatly appreciate this aspect of the film, I did not necessarily enjoy the film. I usually look for a film to show me something different, something unexpected, not ordinary and tragic aspects of life. The realism is what distinguishes this film from others but also the reason why I didn't enjoy it. Appreciate it? Yes. Enjoy? Not so much.
Heaven's heart tells the story of two couples. Ulf and Ann, the first married couple, are best friends with Susanna and Lars, the other married couple. The film follows the couples at dinner parties and other interactions at their two homes, all centering on the topic of adultery. Through a conversation at their first dinner party in the film, the viewers are enlightened to their individual opinions on the matter. Lars and Ann are adamantly opposed to adultery in any form while Ulf and Susanna seem to think there are some exceptions. Ironically, it is Lars and Ann who begin an affair, putting to the test all that their formerly understanding spouses had said on the matter previously. Ulf seems more understanding than Susanna, ultimately, and the movie ends on a bittersweet note where one couple finds a way to move past and the other ends broken.
This is not a film I would normally enjoy watching. This film is not an escape but rather a reminder of the loss of trust, a common experience in society. This theme is woven throughout the film, along with the theme of deception, as the audience is privy to the cheating being hidden from friends and spouses. The film is also not visually stimulating. The costumes are everyday clothing, the sets look like average Scandinavian homes, and the cast is made up of four actors. The realistic aspect of the film that those simple choices provide gives the viewer the sense that they are at a theater rather than watching a film.
One aspect of this film that stood out to me, that a theatrical production would be unable to produce, is the different shots the director chose to use to magnify the scenes. The shots in this film are still and simple. There is not a single time that the camera pans, there are only a few times when it slowly zooms in, and only a few shots are shown with more than one person. The shots of characters alone, closely showing the emotions displayed on their expressive faces, magnifies the isolation each character feels as they are alienated from their friends and their spouse, navigating through unfamiliar relationship issues.
Though the four characters are ordinary in many ways, their acting is anything but. Mikael Persbrandt (Lars), Lena Endre (Susanna), Jakob Eklund (Ulf), and Maria Lundqvist (Ann) make up this stellar cast. The cast is able to portray the difficult circumstances and their individual heartbreak in a way that the audience leaves feeling like they just lost their friends and spouse. Quick wit and sharp jabs, especially from Susanna towards her husband Lars, show clearly the anger that is felt because of his betrayal, betrayal that she had been justifying within someone else's life earlier in the film. And while this anger accumulates and their relationship ends in a divorce attorney's office, Ann and Ulf rekindle what they had lost, proving the old phrase "you don't know what you've got until it is gone."
The bittersweet aspect of this film's ending comes from the fact that while Lars thought he had found what he was looking for in Ann, he wrecked his relationship with his wife, his best friend, and ended up helping Ann and Ulf rekindle their romance. The film leaves audiences in a moral dilemma. While many can see that the film shows the moral high ground as Lars, the cheating husband, ends up estranged from his wife and daughter, the flip side is that Ann, the cheating wife, ends up with the life she has always dreamed of thus posing the question to the audience that the couples began the film trying to figure out. Is there any justification for adultery?
Technically speaking, this film excels in many ways that traditional films do not. And while I greatly appreciate this aspect of the film, I did not necessarily enjoy the film. I usually look for a film to show me something different, something unexpected, not ordinary and tragic aspects of life. The realism is what distinguishes this film from others but also the reason why I didn't enjoy it. Appreciate it? Yes. Enjoy? Not so much.